- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 11,923
- Location
- Indianapolis
- WCA ID
- 2007HUGH01
- YouTube
- Visit Channel
It was named after Arnaud van Galen, an early popularizer of the method, and by the way the originator of our weekly Speedsolving.com online competition!
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/AvG_edge_pairing
I think this is probably it, although I haven't had time to watch it all just now. There are some advanced techniques that can make it really very move efficient, but in general it's just simply 2 at a time edge pairing. A very simplistic method, but you can get quite fast at it. Erik was able to get sub-1 with V-Cubes using it at one point.
Oh, and here's Arnaud himself explaining the basic method:
Once you go to 6x6x6 and above, lucky cases tend to become much more common, and I think that causes AvG to become substantially less efficient. But on 5x5x5 lucky cases tend to be as common for AvG as for freeslice, so I think the benefit mostly vanishes. The main benefit to freeslice is the way the completed edges stay put, so as you go it gets easier because you have fewer edges to check for remaining pieces. But AvG means much less thinking in a lot of ways, and yet can be quite efficient. If you can get your lookahead good enough that you can constant turn with AvG (despite having to occasionally find pieces at the back of the cube), I suspect you could still be world class with it.
https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/AvG_edge_pairing
I think this is probably it, although I haven't had time to watch it all just now. There are some advanced techniques that can make it really very move efficient, but in general it's just simply 2 at a time edge pairing. A very simplistic method, but you can get quite fast at it. Erik was able to get sub-1 with V-Cubes using it at one point.
Oh, and here's Arnaud himself explaining the basic method:
Once you go to 6x6x6 and above, lucky cases tend to become much more common, and I think that causes AvG to become substantially less efficient. But on 5x5x5 lucky cases tend to be as common for AvG as for freeslice, so I think the benefit mostly vanishes. The main benefit to freeslice is the way the completed edges stay put, so as you go it gets easier because you have fewer edges to check for remaining pieces. But AvG means much less thinking in a lot of ways, and yet can be quite efficient. If you can get your lookahead good enough that you can constant turn with AvG (despite having to occasionally find pieces at the back of the cube), I suspect you could still be world class with it.
Right. I think at least one of the parities involved using odd vs. even numbers of slice moves to solve the centers. So if you first solved it with 10 moves and then finished the solve and had that type of parity (can't remember if it was OLL or PLL), you could solve the centers with 11 moves and guarantee that parity would go away.
)
